Politics and Ethics Review最新文献

Genetic Profiling: Ethical Constraints upon Criminal Investigation Procedures 基因分析:刑事调查程序的伦理约束

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1743453X0700300207

M. Boylan

引用次数: 1

Political Scandal and the Politics of Exposure: From Watergate to Lewinsky and beyond: 政治丑闻和政治曝光:从水门事件到莱温斯基及以后:

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.3366/PER.2007.3.2.181

Stephen W. Welch

引用次数: 3

The Ideological Roots of Right-Wing Ethnoregionalism and the Civic Republican Critique 右翼民族地方主义的思想根源与公民共和主义批判

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1743453X0700300208

Alberto Spektorowski

引用次数: 0

Moral Actors and Political Spectators: On Some Virtues and Vices of Rawls's Liberalism 道德行动者与政治旁观者:罗尔斯自由主义的若干美德与罪恶

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1743453X0700300206

Giovanni De Grandis

{"title":"Moral Actors and Political Spectators: On Some Virtues and Vices of Rawls's Liberalism","authors":"Giovanni De Grandis","doi":"10.1177/1743453X0700300206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1743453X0700300206","url":null,"abstract":"The paper defends the theoretical strength and consistency of Rawls's constructivism, showing its ability to articulate and convincingly weave together several key ethical ideas; yet it questions the political relevance of this admirable normative architecture. After having illustrated Rawls's conception of moral agency and practical reason, the paper tackles two criticisms raised by Scheffler. First the allegation of naturalism based on Rawls's disdain of common sense ideas on desert is rebutted. It is then shown that, contrary to Scheffler's contention, Rawls takes proper account of our moral sentiments in the process of constructing his normative theory. Finally, the second criticism is assessed, namely the inability of Rawls's theory to increase consent around liberal policies. Despite disagreement with details of Scheffler's argument, it is suggested that the failure of recent normative liberal theories to have a political impact belies their inability to take into proper consideration the reality of politics. A more realistic appraisal of political life and of historical events and developments are called for if political philosophy wants to be something more than an academic exercise.","PeriodicalId":381236,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Ethics Review","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126043835","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Is Workfare Egalitarian 工作福利是平等的吗

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.3366/PER.2007.3.2.200

Neil Hibbert

引用次数: 6

Notes on Contributors 投稿人说明

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1743453x0700300202

引用次数: 0

Moral Actors and Political Spectators: On Some Virtues and Vices of Rawls's Liberalism 道德行动者与政治旁观者:罗尔斯自由主义的若干美德与罪恶

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.3366/PER.2007.3.2.217

G. Grandis

引用次数: 0

Book Review: Just and Unjust Interventions in World Politics: Public and Private 书评:《世界政治中的公正与不公正干预:公共与私人》

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1743453X0700300210

T. Shepperd

{"title":"Book Review: Just and Unjust Interventions in World Politics: Public and Private","authors":"T. Shepperd","doi":"10.1177/1743453X0700300210","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1743453X0700300210","url":null,"abstract":"This is a very timely publication given recent developments in the international arena; the most obvious being the war on terror, the military interventions into Afghanistan and Iraq, and the continuing atrocities taking place in the Sudan. When we look at what is occurring in today’s world we see ample evidence of inhumanity. The once dominant ethical primacy of sovereignty has come under increasing attack with recent atrocities, and appeals for intervention on behalf of the international community call into question the notion of the ‘privacy’ of states – an analogue for their sovereignty – as a moral good. However, the act of intervention itself has been shrouded in controversy, as have the determinants of human rights. In Just and Unjust Interventions in World Politics: Public and Private Catherine Lu sets out to contribute to the normative debate relating to the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention. She introduces some key concepts, most notably that of ‘privacy’, and ties them to the ethics of intervention. Her central theoretical construct revolves around the public/private distinction, a worthy line of investigation that remains largely unexplained in International Relations (IR) discourse. Lu examines the construction of certain concepts which we employ to illuminate the normative structure of international society, for example state sovereignty, national interest, human rights, but most im portantly the international/domestic distinction. She offers an examination of the public/private distinction at the international level and how it relates to legitimacy. Put simply, a central theme of the book relates to the construction of a morally coherent account of the distinction that serves to shape the public and private lives of states. Just and Unjust Interventions is divided into eight chapters. It begins with an introduction and subsequent investigation into the debates relating to the public/private distinction, and the structure of agency thus entailed. Following this, in chapter 2, Lu considers the applicability of such a construct to IR,","PeriodicalId":381236,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Ethics Review","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131222549","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Catherine Lu ,Just and Unjust Interventions in World Politics: Public and Private(New York: Palgrave Macmillan: 2006), 224 pp., £45/$75 hardcover. 《世界政治中的公正与非正义干预:公共与私人》(纽约:帕尔格雷夫·麦克米伦出版社:2006)，224页，精装版，45英镑/ 75美元。

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.3366/PER.2007.3.2.288

T. Shepperd

引用次数: 0

Considering Reasonableness 考虑合理性

Politics and Ethics Review Pub Date : 2007-10-01 DOI: 10.1177/1743453X0700300203

Shaun P. Young

{"title":"Considering Reasonableness","authors":"Shaun P. Young","doi":"10.1177/1743453X0700300203","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1743453X0700300203","url":null,"abstract":"Despite the relative ease and regularity with which it is used by policymakers and the functional role that it often plays in the policy development process, the concept of reasonableness has essentially been overlooked by public policy scholars in their analysis of the factors influencing the development of public policy. However, the maintenance of the analytical status quo is likely to prove increasingly difficult. As the issues that governments must address become increasingly complicated and controversial and it becomes correspondingly more difficult to identify easily or clearly the most appropriate response to associated problems, policymakers will inevitably be forced to place greater reliance on the concept of reasonableness as the final court of appeal when seeking to determine the attractiveness and acceptability of policy decisions. Accordingly, it seems ‘reasonable’ to suggest that greater, explicit consideration be given to the concept of reasonableness and the role it does and should play in the development of public policy. This article simultaneously offers both a brief overview of the current situation with respect to the meaningful consideration of the concept of reasonableness by public policy scholars and practitioners and a preliminary argument for a reconsideration of the analytical status quo.","PeriodicalId":381236,"journal":{"name":"Politics and Ethics Review","volume":"899 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2007-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116391652","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0